Feeling the Pull of Nostalgia

[_Ray A]

But, under Mormon theology, they will have no familial rights to one another. It's another form of cruelty in a world of religions often littered with such cruelties.

I really don't think you understand very much about "Mormon theology", or, for that matter, about God.

[_beastie]

Huck,

Despite our apparent difference in terms of theism/atheism, I've noticed that we often have similar trains of thought or responses to issues. Your explanation of how you perceive God might be - if I understood you correctly, kind of the encapsulation of the spiritual dimension of our connectedness with other human beings - is actually one that I had also pondered myself several years ago. I didn't become an atheist overnight, and toyed with various "ways to believe", so to speak, before considering myself an atheist altogether. I attended various different churches and considered different theologies. I did seem to me that once you peel away the layers - I would say layers that could be considered superficial in ways - and get down to the core of what most religions agree upon - that this connectedness with other humans extending to God was at the root of it all.

It was actually my relationship with my boyfriend that inspired me to consider that maybe "god", or whatever afterlife there could be, might be some form of complete oneness that leads to nirvana. As you point out, we obviously need other human beings - we even physically need to be touched. Perhaps it is related to some unconscious longing for the oneness we experienced with our mothers in the womb. My boyfriend and I have experienced a type of "mini nirvana" at times, due to our deep emotional and intimate connections. I have wondered if this is what "god" is about - achieving that kind of mystical union that is so deeply gratifying on a far wider scale. So we could pare down all the religion to be versions of God saying "be connected with me, be one with me", and perhaps ultimately with all human kind.

So I do relate to what you're saying, although, in the end, I couldn't sustain belief in that, either. Although I will say that my relationship to my boyfriend, which really is some sort of soulmate connection - is the one thing that can provoke these type of musings in me.

If it turns out that, after my death, I am surprised by some continuation of self, I would be delighted if it actually entailed this type of nirvana, versus the busy worker bee Mormon heaven, or the heaven where the chaff are tortured eternally.

[_beastie]

mg-

Within Mormon theology what kind of relationship do you think they could have? Would there be no possibility of happiness?

Well, we all know Joseph Smith said that even the lesser degrees of glory are wonderful beyond imagination, so it assures us of happiness. Yet it also assures us that only those in the highest degree of glory will retain familial rights and relations. Families are forever, but only for those in the Celestial Kingdom. So to construct a paradigm that simultaneously allows for some sort of eternal bliss and familial loss is as baffling to me as constructing a paradigm that simultaneously bathes believers in eternal bliss while torturing others for eternity.

I also don't understand how Heavenly Father or Mother themselves could be experiencing this sort of perfect joy when they know they will never see the majority of their spirit children ever again.

ray -

I really don't think you understand very much about "Mormon theology", or, for that matter, about God.

Instead of just informing me that I don't understand, tell me what I don't understand, and what the correct understanding is. It is basic Mormon theology that only those who enter the Celestial Kingdom will have their "family forever", is it not? So what don't I understand? That perhaps some form of emotional lobotomy will take place after death that will make the rest of us happy to lose our families?

[_Ray A]

Instead of just informing me that I don't understand, tell me what I don't understand, and what the correct understanding is. It is basic Mormon theology that only those who enter the Celestial Kingdom will have their "family forever", is it not? So what don't I understand? That perhaps some form of emotional lobotomy will take place after death that will make the rest of us happy to lose our families?

You've already performed that "emotional lobotomy" on your former belief. I don't know why you even think this is "cruel". Separation from families, that is, since you categorically don't even believe it!

Can you explain to me how something "fictional" is "cruel"?? I mean, in your opinion Joseph Smith ranks with Alfred E. Neumann, right? Do MAD magazine comics offend you?

[_beastie]

Is that it? That's how I so seriously misunderstand Mormon theology and God? So I really don't misunderstand, do I? You just don't think I should call it cruel since I don't believe in it.



Yes, I believe it is fictional, just like I believe the fundie EV hell is fictional. But both teachings are cruel. It is cruel to encourage people to believe that if their loved ones don't accept their beliefs, they will be eternally divided from them, or their loved ones will be tortured for eternity.


Moreover, in discussions like these, when I talk about it being cruel, I am talking about how IF it is true, then it is a cruel act of God. IF the fundie EV belief is true, God is cruel to torture people in hell for eternity. IF Mormonism is true, then God is cruel to forcible divorce loving family members from one another.

You know, I can't believe I have to explain something so self evident as this. Sometimes I think you just say things like "you don't understand Mormon theology or god" because you can't think of a real way to demonstrate I'm wrong. Telling me I don't understand Mormon theology, and then your answer has nothing to do with me understanding Mormon theology, is some sort of game of dodgeball.

[_Blixa]

Oh how well I know the pull of nostalgia and the eerie displacements of walking through the old landscapes. Your post, runtu, reminded me of my own Return To Utah---in 2002 after a 15 year absence (really more like 20 if you want to be exact). It was an astonishing experience, not the least because I was visiting under the family radar for two days only and under the most bizarre circumstances possible.

(I don't think I've written about that anywhere you or KA would have seen it---maybe I'll make up a board blog post about it later today;)

I spent one whole day walking around a part of the city where a lot of the Important Events of My Youth went down. Not much had changed in over twenty years. It was like time travel. Or being a ghost haunting my own past. It was so disorienting to be physically in those old places, and yet be in mental and emotional places galaxies apart from whoever I was then. I don’t think I can even reconstruct how I used to think about the world or feel about things. I feel no connection to that earlier version. I am a completely different person now in so many ways.

And yet there I stood, outside one of my old SLC apartments (on 1st Avenue right behind the governor's mansion) looking at a crack in a kitchen window I'd made in 1982.

[_mentalgymnast]

mg-

Within Mormon theology what kind of relationship do you think they could have? Would there be no possibility of happiness?

Well, we all know Joseph Smith said that even the lesser degrees of glory are wonderful beyond imagination, so it assures us of happiness. Yet it also assures us that only those in the highest degree of glory will retain familial rights and relations. Families are forever, but only for those in the Celestial Kingdom. So to construct a paradigm that simultaneously allows for some sort of eternal bliss and familial loss is as baffling to me as constructing a paradigm that simultaneously bathes believers in eternal bliss while torturing others for eternity.

What are the particular familial rights and relations...and let's add in obligations and responsibilities, that you would wish to retain? When you say "familial loss", are you referring to losing the opportunity to associate, love, cherish and "hang out" with the person or persons that you love...or something more? Are you assuming that the same pleasures associated with "familial rights and relations" here on earth would be existent in an "eternal bliss"? You go on to say "torturing others for eternity". Are these the same individuals that are experiencing a "glory... wonderful beyond imagination"?

I would expect that if you, as an unbeliever, die and find out that there is something on "the other side" you will also be pleased to find out that your boyfriend and yourself will still have association and happiness beyond description together. The question is, would you and your boyfriend want to "sign on" to what could be fairly significant obligations and responsibilities, if God were to put them before you, or are there certain rights that you would demand regardless of the obligations and responsibilities which may be attached?

Would you expect that God would simply trust and honor you with certain responsibilities and obligations?

Regards,
MG

[_wenglund]

Is that it? That's how I so seriously misunderstand Mormon theology and God? So I really don't misunderstand, do I? You just don't think I should call it cruel since I don't believe in it.

Yes, I believe it is fictional, just like I believe the fundie EV hell is fictional. But both teachings are cruel. It is cruel to encourage people to believe that if their loved ones don't accept their beliefs, they will be eternally divided from them, or their loved ones will be tortured for eternity.

Moreover, in discussions like these, when I talk about it being cruel, I am talking about how IF it is true, then it is a cruel act of God. IF the fundie EV belief is true, God is cruel to torture people in hell for eternity. IF Mormonism is true, then God is cruel to forcible divorce loving family members from one another.

You know, I can't believe I have to explain something so self evident as this. Sometimes I think you just say things like "you don't understand Mormon theology or god" because you can't think of a real way to demonstrate I'm wrong. Telling me I don't understand Mormon theology, and then your answer has nothing to do with me understanding Mormon theology, is some sort of game of dodgeball.

Let me see if I have this correct. You think it cruel to teach that in the post-mortal eternities some family member may be separated from each other due to differing beliefs, yet you are quite accepting of the teahing that all families and their members will be obliterated after death (either by them ceasing to exist or melding into a indistinguishable oneness).

Forgive me, but that kind of moralizing strikes me as quite upside-down.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

Let me see if I have this correct. You think it cruel to teach that in the post-mortal eternities some family member may be separated from each other due to differing beliefs, yet you are quite accepting of the teahing that all families and their members will be obliterated after death (either by them ceasing to exist or melding into a indistinguishable oneness).

Forgive me, but that kind of moralizing strikes me as quite upside-down.

The annihilation of self is not due to some deity punishing people, it's just nature.

by the way, were you in some state of agony or fear before you were born?

What are the particular familial rights and relations...and let's add in obligations and responsibilities, that you would wish to retain? When you say "familial loss", are you referring to losing the opportunity to associate, love, cherish and "hang out" with the person or persons that you love...or something more? Are you assuming that the same pleasures associated with "familial rights and relations" here on earth would be existent in an "eternal bliss"? You go on to say "torturing others for eternity". Are these the same individuals that are experiencing a "glory... wonderful beyond imagination"?

First, when I refer to torturing people for eternity, I'm referring to the fundie EV hell. I've been talking about two different concepts, and how each is cruel in its own right.

I am talking about "losing the opportunity to associate, love, cherish and "hang out" with the person or persons that you love". If you are going to insist this isn't an LDS teaching, then the entire push of sealing families so you can be "together forever" makes zero sense.

I'm not interested in being a goddess at all. I'm not interested in parenting spirit children and then accepting that, if they make the "wrong" choices, I will never see them again.

[_Jason Bourne]

mg-

Within Mormon theology what kind of relationship do you think they could have? Would there be no possibility of happiness?

Well, we all know Joseph Smith said that even the lesser degrees of glory are wonderful beyond imagination, so it assures us of happiness. Yet it also assures us that only those in the highest degree of glory will retain familial rights and relations. Families are forever, but only for those in the Celestial Kingdom. So to construct a paradigm that simultaneously allows for some sort of eternal bliss and familial loss is as baffling to me as constructing a paradigm that simultaneously bathes believers in eternal bliss while torturing others for eternity.

I also don't understand how Heavenly Father or Mother themselves could be experiencing this sort of perfect joy when they know they will never see the majority of their spirit children ever again.

ray -

I really don't think you understand very much about "Mormon theology", or, for that matter, about God.

Instead of just informing me that I don't understand, tell me what I don't understand, and what the correct understanding is. It is basic Mormon theology that only those who enter the Celestial Kingdom will have their "family forever", is it not? So what don't I understand? That perhaps some form of emotional lobotomy will take place after death that will make the rest of us happy to lose our families?

For those not in th Celestial Kingdom I think we still will know each other and share relations. It seems one would have as much of a relationship with a family member even if they are not sealed and a "forever family" as they would under Christian doctrine. However, if the kingdoms are separated then there would be no relations with anyone not on your kingdom.